`Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 6:49 PM
`To: Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV>
`Cc: jim@carmichaelip.com; Carol Spiegel <carol@carmichaelip.com>; Flibbert, Michael
`<michael.flibbert@finnegan.com>; Queler, Maureen <Maureen.Queler@finnegan.com>
`Subject: RE: IPR2015‐01993 Request for Call with the Board
`
`Dear Mr. Kellogg,
`
`In response to your inquiry, Patent Owner seeks to file a motion to strike certain portions of Petitioner’s Reply to
`Biogen’s Opposition (Paper 46) filed September 28, 2016, and certain portions of Dr. Pleasure’s declaration (Ex.
`1045). These papers raise a new obviousness theory, i.e., the “point dose” theory, which is an improper reply. Rule
`42.23(b). Patent Owner therefore seeks a call with the Board to request authorization to file a short motion to strike as
`the Board has previously authorized. E.g., Maxlinear, Inc. v. Crest Tech. Corp., IPR2015‐00594, Paper 48 at 2 (PTAB Mar.
`18, 2016); Volkswagen Grp. of Am., Inc. v. Emerachem Holdings, LLC, IPR2014‐01555, Paper 36 at 5‐7 (PTAB Oct. 9,
`2015). Alternatively, Patent Owner requests a call to obtain the Board’s guidance on how to address the improper reply
`arguments and evidence.
`
`Please let me know if the Board would like additional information.
`
`Sincerely,
`Erin M. Sommers
`Reg. No. 60,974
`Back‐up Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`Erin M. Sommers
`Associate
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
`901 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001-4413
`+ 202 408 4292 | fax: + 202 408 4400 | erin.sommers@finnegan.com | www.finnegan.com
`
`From: Trials [mailto:Trials@USPTO.GOV]
`Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 3:34 PM
`To: Sommers, Erin; Trials
`Cc: jim@carmichaelip.com; Carol Spiegel; Flibbert, Michael; Queler, Maureen
`Subject: RE: IPR2015-01993 Request for Call with the Board
`
`Counsel,
`
`Can you please be more detailed about the papers you wish to file?
`
`Thanks,
`
`Andrew Kellogg,
`
`1
`
`PTAB Exhibit 3001
`Coalition v. Biogen
`IPR2015-01993
`
`
`
`Supervisory Paralegal
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`USPTO
`andrew.kellogg@uspto.gov
`Direct: 571-272-5366
`
`
`
`
`From: Sommers, Erin [mailto:Erin.Sommers@finnegan.com]
`Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 9:53 AM
`To: Trials <Trials@USPTO.GOV>
`Cc: jim@carmichaelip.com; Carol Spiegel <carol@carmichaelip.com>; Flibbert, Michael
`<michael.flibbert@finnegan.com>; Queler, Maureen <Maureen.Queler@finnegan.com>
`Subject: IPR2015‐01993 Request for Call with the Board
`
`
`Dear PTAB,
`
`I write on behalf of Patent Owner to request a conference call with the Board, during which Patent Owner plans to seek
`authorization to file a motion to strike Petitioner’s new “point dose” obviousness arguments and evidence as an
`improper reply under Rule 42.23(b).
`
`
`Patent Owner and Petitioner met and conferred and no resolution was reached. Both parties are generally available on
`Wednesday, October 12.
`
`
`Sincerely,
`Erin M. Sommers
`Reg. No. 60,974
`Back‐up Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Erin M. Sommers
`Associate
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
`901 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001-4413
`+ 202 408 4292 | fax: + 202 408 4400 | erin.sommers@finnegan.com | www.finnegan.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`This e-mail message is intended only for individual(s) to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, proprietary, or otherwise
`exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you believe you have received this message in error, please advise the sender by return e-mail and delete it from
`your mai box. Thank you.
`
`
`This e-mail message is intended only for individual(s) to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, proprietary, or otherwise
`exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you believe you have received this message in error, please advise the sender by return e-mail and delete it from
`your mai box. Thank you.
`
`2
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
